alex1138

I don't know whether to reply to you or slowin's reply but this is correct. And I tend not to think it was Dorsey's fault. And apparently Musk has indeed made a mess of Twitter but it's also wrong to assume there weren't massive problems with old Twitter too

A bunch of people working in the industry with a vested interest in shaping narrative being able to flag any comment or post whenever. What could POSSIBLY go wrong

I have to agree. The man has always been accused of stealing from others going back to the Winklevosses. He'll take any side is expedient regardless of what you (general 'you') think politically

Youtube has sucked for many years. I just don't know how much Google is responsible for it. Back in 2006, they were dealing with copyright battles (despite the fact they won their lawsuit against Viacom) so Google bought them to help them out with their resources. The site itself has tons of censorship and bad targeting on the recommended videos and I think Neal Mohan has made it even worse the last few years with more and more ads and Shorts and everything

The replies to you and giancarlostoro are of course disgusting, typical for "hacker" news (please the man, serve the man)

The fact this was [dead] says everything you need to know about hacker news

I tried selling a VPN service once called TurtleSpeed

I have no idea why no one bought it

More than Facebook itself already does...?

Try logging out for a few days and watch the extremely vague (and sometimes OUTRIGHT FAKE) email notifications roll in

It's a deposition

The comments on Zuck's are funny

Typical "lawyer is so stupid, she's asking dumb questions, repetitive questions"

Yeah, people - it's a deposition. Getting Zuck to blab is what they're looking for

Yes, I remember an article in the Guardian about this, around 2015-6

Facebook does this. People think 'privacy' as a complaint and perhaps think about advertising on FB but straight up, settings get reset (including posts suddenly becoming Public. or graph search.)

Why? Because Mark Zuckerberg does not believe in it. In 2010 he said privacy was no longer a social norm. Not only does he himself not believe in it, but he can't keep it to himself. He knows 'better than you'. So, he outright changes it himself or instructs his engineers to do it

It's like with Free Basics in India. You could, theoretically, support it. Many didn't, it was a form of digital colonialism. But let's say you happened to think it was a good idea. It didn't matter either way: Facebook sent emails on users' behalf to TRAI

That's who Zuckerberg is. A sociopath, a criminal, someone who knows nothing but how to steal

So apropos of nothing remember when Zuck bought a castle rather than spend that money on any sort of Facebook account support?

This place included. You can get flagged and downvoted pretty quick.

The Taliban can tweet (pre-Musk) but Donald can't

(I dislike Musk for many reasons but you cannot tell me there were 'no problems' with old Twitter or that every criticism was a 'nothingburger')